It seems that many firearms advocates are also personal property advocates... i often hear, on this board and others, talk of defending one's home and protecting one's family. On a different topic someone suggested comparing one's property to an independent nation, based on his rules, as long as they don't violate US (and state) laws. So here's the rub... why the outrage when someone else uses that same set of property rights? maybe Kroger's is wrong, maybe not, but you have to accept that they have the right to deny access to those carrying firearms... Yes, you have a constitutional right to carry, but just like you can't come on my property to exhibit your first ammendment right of speach, you can't come on my property to exhibit your second ammendment right to carry, at least not without my approval... i support the right to carry, but i would temper that by saying that if i were a bar owner I would not want firearms on the premises, and i don't care about statistics or whatever, it's my choice, and i would hope that people would respect that.
